Neowin.net

After a talk with an MSDN representative I was told it is being uploaded right now and that they posted the link too early. I was told to check back in a few hours...

I can't wait to test it out either. I will initially load it in VMware and see where it goes...

build publicly, but probably 100's of builds have passed internally....

well its not RC yet... "RC Preview"

Considering that Vista has already been released.... I'd agree.

Yes, and I hope they hurry it up! I'm down to one copy of Vista (on a pre-configured laptop) and am curious as to how well this SP works before I dump that copy of Vista for XP, too.

Apparently you didn't read any of the comments.. but I'll sum them up for you.

Apparently there never was a d/l link, and now the announcement is gone.. like it didn't exist.

Apparently you were late and didn't see the link when it was working.

Apparently the link never worked, because MSDN says they are still transferring the files to the sites....

I read a blog somewhere from some of the Vista/Connect developers and basically it said TechNet will probably never get a beta/RC of it.. only MSDN will get a copy, besides the Connect people.

What about this, then?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windows...a/bb738089.aspx

Like I said, just going off what I saw.

http://blogs.msdn.com/msdnsubscriptions/ar...ome-server.aspx



Different info at different places.. noone knows whats going on at MS apparently.

Well this isn't a release candidate..its a preview for one.

I'm not disagreeing with you, and it does appear this way, but you are not the OP and don't even appear to be a mod or anything, so how about we leave that to the real guys to remove/decide/close...

Wasn't trying to be, just letting you all know that the information posted to MSDN was incorrect.

Source?

Myself...

Not to contradict you Cullen since I know you a little bit, but I haven't seen anything official posted to anyone either direction as of yet.

I'm still on your side of this though, it wouldn't make since for any RC builds to be posted to the public this early on.

Hey Shane, there is no official statement, but I first pointed it out to MS and they took it down, since it is not true.

Last edited by cullend11 on 02 Nov 2007 - 23:15

Next you'll be saying you contacted your buddy Billy G. and had a long talk with him about having it removed from the site.. I'm not trying to be mean, but you sound like an ass...

Actually he sounds like a potential MS employee or someone who talks to the MSDN team on occasion. There are only a few employees over there who are on the developer-relations side of the fence. It really isn't that difficult to get to know all their people if you call over there, email, and manage multiple accounts/renewals, etc.

If thats the case, why not just state that... read my comment below for info directly from someone at MS.

I've had plenty of relations with vendors where my firm got unprecedented access to people and technology. Sometimes we were hit with a blanket NDA, other times it was on our honor since burning them would just hose our negotiated pricing and special privileges. You can't publicly say who you know, because it's just classless, and your contacts wouldn't want it known. Anonymity can be a good thing because it can be better to be known as some random guy than getting endless email or PMs about whatever you do for a living.

Who knows, he might be pals with their director of dev-relations. You might have just chatted with a CSR and heard the skinny running through the cubicle farm. The guy could also be on the Vista team (or a contractor, whatever) and might have just sent the MSDN web admin an email telling him he jumped the gun.

Still given the circumstances, its obvious someone made an oops. They've done it before. Missed release targets, made public announcements that didn't synch with anything. So goes life. Given the current state of reality, his statement seems more accurate than your chat.

I still fail to see how some random guy on a forum's statement of, "I told them to pull it, the source is me, you are wrong and MS is wrong" seems more accurate then an actual chat with an MSDN rep....

It's like getting breaking news from someone in a cave on the moon, as opposed to a news caster standing on the scene.

Either way, I'm not going to argue with you guys... because when the link is put back up "Sometime before Monday" then my entire point will be made.

Actually it's you that sounds like an ass.

Are you an official beta tester? Cullen and I actually are. We both have been up to campus within the last 30 days. I don't think you have, or have the contacts that we have.

Ok so your telling me that the guys that work at MS, in the MSDN department are wrong? I am not making up stuff.. I am just posting what they said. Perhaps if you had MSDN yourself you could goto chat and check for yourself.

I've got nothing to lie about.... so... balls in your court now.

They are still in the dark about the issue. You really don't need to believe me, thought I would just give you some insight.

Thanks but they were pretty enlightening about the issue when I just asked them, and I'd trust someone at the MSDN site directly over someone on a forum.

Pretty enlightening?

I guess you like talking to Miss Cleo too right?

The guy you spoke with wasn't a dev or someone in the know. He's a site support rep, plain and simple.

So you're telling me you think tech beta testers wouldn't know more than you?


-EDIT, It now seems that Microsoft has confirmed what Cullen and I were saying. It was a mistake and there is no download. Is that official enough for you phiberoptik?

Last edited by Morpheus Phreak on 03 Nov 2007 - 11:00

Jumping frog ?

While I don't know, I'd say don't install it unless you are prepared to format at a later date. I'd imagine you should be fine, but theres always the chance something could go wrong or the upgrade path won't be there for a preview RC. Besides, I dont think this build is intended for live environments so much.

Internet sarcasm is impossible to deal with.

It's funny that you should say that since, well, they aren't, really.